Arba'een 2022
Salam,
1400 years ago a revolution took place in the barren desert of Karbala. In this piece, we examine the causes of the revolt of Imam Hussain (a.s) and the lessons it has for our time. God willing, I will elaborate more on the latter in a follow-up article.
Reference for material: books by Martyr Mutahhari
Art: @for2a and @nabihaiderali
Contemporary society, irrespective of race and religion, would do well to have a closer look at the Hero of Karbala’ as his message transcends the barriers of caste creed, race, and religion.
More than Fourteen hundred years have passed but the memory of that adorable hero, who resolutely faced the soul-searching trials and tribulations, has not diminished. On the contrary, it has grown in intensity. Imbued with exemplary fortitude, moral fiber, and aplomb, Hussain has emerged as the most revered and meritorious martyr the world has produced, who established the highest standards of excellence on which humanity prides itself.
To understand a particular matter or a state of affairs, you should know the deeper reasons underlying its existing form and the characteristics that gave it that specific appearance.
The history of most Islamic revolts or uprisings speaks of the rationale behind such revolts, in that they came as a result of a complete understanding of the status quo they were determined to change. Thus, Imam Husayn’s revolt was not a result of an angry outburst, prompted by the pressures exerted by the Umayyad rule, especially during the reigns of Mu’aawiyah [the founder of the dynastic rule], and his son, Yazid.
Looking at Imam Husayn’s revolt from another perspective, i.e. the way he was treating his followers, one can only come to one conclusion. He was determined not to let the feelings of his companions run high, in a bid to avoid his revolt’s earning any description of an explosive one. Part of this strategy was his repeated attempts to appeal to his companions to leave his company, to spare them the fate that was awaiting them all, i.e. him included. He used to remind them now and then that they should not expect any materialistic gain in their march, other than definite death.
Our western-centric definition of revolution has come to be defined as one where there is an explosion due to angry outbursts of people suffering from worsening material conditions. Rarely does it stem from moral conscience, only material causes are considered.
According to Brittanica :
Revolution, in social and political science, is a major, sudden, and hence typically violent alteration in government and related associations and structures.
Some factors of a revolution are capable of enhancing their richness and appeal. This is the result of the theoretical differences between one revolution and the other. Some are bereft of the moral dimension and characterized by bigotry; others may be purely materialistic, giving them their distinctive features. And yet, if a revolution is characterized by moral, human, and divine aspects, it should stand head and shoulders above all other revolutions.
The human being attaches importance to certain things as he believes they elevate a person’s standing, beauty, power, and high profile, especially divine positions, which are viewed by man as sources of pride, splendor, and value.
In as much as a certain factor adds a new value to the value of the person, he in return gives a boost to this value. For example, the attire of a spiritual person (cleric) or a university professor could exude pride and aesthetic appearance to those who wear those uniforms. The opposite is also true, in that the person in those garbs is the source of pride and aestheticism due to their impeccable character, probity, and knowledge.
Sa’sa’a bin Sawhan was one of Imam Ali’s companions and a renowned and consummate orator; he was commended by the famous man of letters, al-Jahidh. When he wanted to congratulate the Imam on his election to the office of Caliphate, he said something to the Imam that was different from what all the other people said, thus, “O Ali! You adorned the caliphate with splendor. You are the source of its pride. It granted you neither grandeur nor pride. The caliphate needed a person of your caliber, and yet you did not need its [allure].
I, therefore, congratulate the caliphate because your name has become synonymous with it; I do not applaud you because you have become the Caliph!”
As a result, it can be said that the factor of “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil” had given Imam Husayn’s revolt an added significance. And by his, his family’s, and companions’ ultimate sacrifice, the Imam has raised the profile of this institution. Imam Husayn (a.s.) demonstrated this on the ground, “I seek to enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil and follow the traditions of my grandfather and my father.”
The hearts of millions of people, be they Arab or non-Arab, who understood the message of the Imam, are conscious of the sincerity of his message, especially when he recited, “I look upon death as felicity and regard life in the shadows of the oppressors as nothing but unhappiness.”
Historically, the first factor in the Imam’s uprising was the Umayyad’s demand of him to swear allegiance to Yazid, [their second Caliph]. In a bid to secure the following of the generality of Muslims to his son, Yazid, Mu’aawiyah sent an emissary to Medina to secure the pledging of such allegiance from Imam Husayn (a.s.). In so doing, Mu’aawiyah had aimed to set a precedent for those rulers who would follow him to appoint their successors, turning the caliphate into a dynastic rule.
Naturally, it was turned down, not least because Husayn (a.s.) was the grandson of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and was widely known for his piety and scant regard for worldly pleasures.
Upon receiving the news of the Imam’s rejection, the ruling establishment issued threats to him. His response was that he would rather die than endorse Yazid’s succession to the caliphate. Up to that point in time, the Imam’s reaction was of the passive type to an unlawful demand. In other words, a reaction based on piety and a reality stemming from the slogan, “There is no god but God”, which makes it incumbent on the believer to say no to any illegitimate demand.
Upholding his religious obligation, the Imam had no choice but to announce his outright rejection of sanctioning Yazid’s appointment [by his father] as Caliph, not least for raising his pure self above that blemish they wanted to stain him with. However, had he agreed to Abdullah bin Abbas’s proposition to retire to the mountains of Yemen to escape the troops of Yazid, he would have secured his safety.
On the other hand, he would have absolved himself from condoning the appointment of Yazid as Caliph. And yet, since the issue was one which related to the appeal to him by those hundred thousand people, he had no alternative but to agree to that appeal out of a religious obligation.
That rejection was not the only reason for the Imam’s revolt. There was another issue, which demonstrated the underlying principle of his revolt; it was a positive reaction. That is, after the demise of Mu’aawiyah, the people of Kufa, [Iraq] cast their memories some twenty years back, i.e. to the days of the caliphate of Imam Ali (a.s.). Despite the fact that many of Ali’s disciples were liquidated by the Umayyad terror machine, such as Hijr bin Adi, Amr bin Hamq al-Khuza’ie, Rashid al-Hijri, and Maytham at-Tammar, just to render Medina bereft of the heavyweights among the companions of the Prophet, the people called to mind how Ali (a.s.) was the example of the true Muslim and his rule a just one.
Thus, they convened in Kufa and agreed among themselves to reject the endorsement of Yazid as caliph, turning their attention to Imam Husayn (a.s.) with the offer to become their Islamic caliph. They wrote to the Imam to this effect, expressing their readiness to welcome him to re-establish the Islamic rule in Kufa. Some one hundred thousand people signed those letters. This formed the third side of the triangle of causes, the other two being the defensive strategy (request of the Umayyads to endorse Yazid’s appointment to the office of the caliphate ) and the offensive strategy (upholding the religious duty of “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil”).
Despite the fact that all the indications were telling him that the Kufans were not up to the task and that they were both inactive and apprehensive. Nevertheless, his sense of responsibility made it incumbent on him to respond to their call and thus provide the right answer to history. Had he chosen to ignore the plea of the Kufans, we would have stood today criticizing him for “not doing so”.
Through deceit, coercion, and false promises of wealth, the despot of Kufa was able to turn the Kufans against the Imam.
The Imam (a.s.) wanted to prove to the people that he did not come for Kufa alone. So, if that province fell to the enemy, it would not change anything. He did not launch his movement in response to the Kufans’ appeal per se. That appeal was among the factors that made him march to Iraq. Imam Hussain made it very clear that he saw himself responsible for discharging a more important duty.
Since the Imam had decided to take an attacking position against the Umayyad rule and marched on that revolutionary path, his rationale for doing so was different from a person who was in a defensive position or an acquiescent one. The position of a person who is repelling an attacker, who has, for example, come to rob him of his possessions, would be getting what was stolen from him and protecting it.
As is customary every year, Muharram comes and the light of Imam Husayn shines on us like beams of light emanating from the sun. His message is heard loud and clear, “The similitude of the inevitability of man’s death is that of a necklace worn by a young woman. I, therefore, yearn to have a reunion with my predecessors in the same way Jacob was yearning to be reunited with [his son] Joseph”, and this glaring statement, “The bastard and the son of a bastard has left us but two choices, either resorting to the sword or capitulating. How preposterous! Humiliation is not our cup of tea! Allah shall never let this happen to us; so shall His Messenger, the believers, chaste and pure laps and proud souls. For the sake of these ideals, we would rather die in honor and not give in to the ignoble.” There is a reference in this sermon to Ibn Ziyad, who had offered the Imam one of two choices, either the sword or ignominious surrender.
That was the message the Imam wanted to live on through time and generations. That is, neither God nor His Messenger and the believers would let a pious believer experience the bitter taste of disgrace. The generations and believers would come to know about the resistance of the Imam when no one would accept the notion of the Imam’s surrendering to the enemy. It was inconceivable that a person, such as the Imam, who was purebred, under the wing of Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter, could give in to indignity.
